alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 30208 Summary Calendar

LABARRIE DEKEDRIC WATSON , P etitioner

- Appellant

v. JERRY GOODWIN, W arden, David Wade Correctional Center , Respondent

- Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:15

- CV

- 2060

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Labarrie Dekedric Watson, Louisiana prisoner # 436988, is appealing the district court’s denial of his motion for bail p ending review by the district court of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas proceeding

. Watson’s motion for a certificate of appealability is unnecessary because there has not been a final order in his habeas case by the district court

. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) ; Harbison v. Bell , 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009).

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 24, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-30208 Document: 00514320265 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/24/2018No. 17

- 30208

2 In order to obtain bail pending review of a habeas petition, Watson must show that he is raising substantial constitutional claims that have a high probability of success, and also that “ extraordinary or exceptional circumstances exist which make the grant of bail necessary to make the habeas remedy effective .” Calley v. Callaway , 496 F.2d 701, 702 (5th Cir. 1974)

. Watson argues in his brief that his counsel was ineffective in failing to respond to errors during his trial and that there is a high probability that he will succeed on his ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Watson prov ides no explanation regarding the specific errors made by counsel or how the alleged

errors affected the outcome of his case. Nor d oes he provide any citations to the relevant parts of the record that supported his claims. Watson has abandoned on appeal his claim that he is raising substantial constitutional claims of ineffective assistance of counsel that have a high probability of

success. See Grant v. Cuellar , 59 F.3d 523, 524

– 25 (5th Cir. 1995); Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222 , 224

– 25 (5th Cir. 1993 ) ; F ED

. R. A PP . P. 28. Watson’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel first made in his re p ly brief will not be considered. See United States v. Jimenez, 509 F.3d 682, 693 n.10 (5th Cir. 2007)

. Because Watson fail s to show t hat he is raising substantial constitutional claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, the court need not consider whether Watson has demonstrated ex traordinary or exceptional circumstances that warrant the grant of bail

. See Calley , 496 F.2d at 702

. T he district court’s denial of Watson ’s motion for bail is AFFIRMED. Watso n’s motion to file a supplemental attachment to his brief is DENIED. Case: 17-30208 Document: 00514320265 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/24/2018
Case: 2:11-cv-00325-EAS-TPK Doc #: 56 Filed: 04/29/13 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-12T14:59:51-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
# C_2007269EN.01001401.xml

| 10.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 September 2007 — Société des Produits Nestlé SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Quick Restaurants SA

(Case C-193/06 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 8(1)(b) - Figurative mark containing the word ‘QUICKY’ - Opposition of holder of earlier national word marks QUICKIES - Likelihood of confusion - Overall assessment)

(2007/C 269/26)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Société des Produits Nestlé SA (represented by: D. Masson, avocat)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, agent), Quick Restaurants SA (represented by E. De Gryse, F. de Visscher and D. Moreau, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of 22 February 2006 in Case T-74/04 Nestlé v OHIM, intervener: Quick Restaurants SA., dismissing the action for annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 December 2003 (Case R 922/2001-2) concerning opposition proceedings in which the parties were Société des Produits Nestlé SA and Quick Restaurants SA

Nestlé

OHIM

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 22 February 2006 in Case T-74/04 Nestlé v OHIM-Quick (QUICKY) to the extent that, contrary to Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark, the Court did not assess the visual similarity of the signs at issue when relying on the overall impression given by them; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 22 February 2006 in Case T-74/04 Nestlé v OHIM-Quick (QUICKY) to the extent that, contrary to Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark, the Court did not assess the visual similarity of the signs at issue when relying on the overall impression given by them;

Nestlé

OHIM

| 2. | Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the appeal as to the remainder;

| 3. | Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Refers the case back to the Court of First Instance of the European Communities;

| 4. | Reserves the costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Reserves the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 165 of 15.7.2006.

1

---
Transport Airplane Directorate 1601 Lind Avenue S W Renton, W ashington 98057 - 3356

Mr. Chris Heck Staff Engineer Engineering & Air Safety Department Air L ine Pilots Association International 535 Herndon Parkway P.O. Box 1169 Herndon, VA 20172 - 1169 August 7 , 2013 Dear Mr. Heck: Thank you for your comments to Docket No. FAA - 2013 - 0317 regarding the final Special Conditions No. 25 - 487 - SC for Airbus Model A330 - 200 airplanes on the subject of the installation of bulk cargo lower deck crew rest compartments. The following addresses yo ur specific concerns. You comment that it is possible that a fully loaded service cart could be parked over the escape hatch. The special conditions requires the escape hatch be assessed with a 95 th percentile male standing on the hatch, as this was determined to be the worst - case scenario. The 95 th percentile male creates a concentrated load directly on the hatch, whereas a cart’s weight is distributed over a much larger area which will only be parti ally on the hatch. You comment that the warning s ys tem should include a visual alarm as well as an audible alarm. The special conditions specificall y require an audible alarm, while the existing regulations cover items such as emergency lighting and autom aticall y presented ox ygen masks. The required emergency lighting and oxygen masks act as visual indicators of an emergency , making an additional visual indicator unnecessary . You comment that the effect of turbulence on an aft location in the airplane for the crew rest makes it difficult to egress up stairs or ladders and creates difficulties in return of captain or relief pilots to the flight deck in an emergency . The FAA never assumes that a crew member who is resting in the cabin or in a dedicated crew rest area must be able to make it to the flight deck in an emergency during severe turbulence. The location of the crew rest in this case is an operational and design consideration. The egress safet y issues are considered during the certification process, and testing is done to show that the occupants of the crew rest can safety evacuate in the event of an in - flight emergency .We find the final special conditions and the existi ng regulatory requirements adequatel y address your comments. We have not changed the special conditions in this regard. Sincerel y, Jeffrey E. Duven Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate Aircraft Certification Service
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# Perspectives from space: earth, an integrated system

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Perspectives from space: earth, an integrated system 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1990-2000 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  171 × 56 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Ideal Contex Magnum G600 54 Plus at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at The University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  PostersMaps 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  index.cpd 
                    -           OCLC Collection Number        
                    -  429489543 

Part of: Perspectives from space: earth, an integrated system (2 objects)     Next

Perspectives from space: earth, an integrated system

Perspectives from space: earth, an integrated system

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
(Reap. Dec. 8201)

#### F. J. Benkart & Company, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 794758.

(Decided February 5, 1953)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I.*Auster, special attorney), for the defendant.

Laweence, Judge:

When this case was called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff. Counsel for defendant *521moved to dismiss the appeal for a reappraisement on the ground of lack of prosecution.

Rule 5 of the rules of this court provides in part as follows:

> * * * Where the plaintiff, petitioner, or appellant, or his attorney, in a case ■does not appear when the same is called, and after the opposite party has had opportunity to present evidence on the issues, it shall be deemed submitted and shall be decided by the court on the record as it appears therein.

In conformity with the requirements of the above-quoted rule, I have examined the papers in this appeal for a reappraisement and find nothing therein contained which would disturb the presumption of correctness attaching to the appraiser’s action.

The motion of defendant to dismiss the appeal for lack of prosecution is denied, and I find and hold the proper value of the merchandise in issue to be the value found by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
NO. 07-10-0063-CR 

 

 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

 AT AMARILLO 

 PANEL B 

 JULY 21, 2010 

 ______________________________ 

 ISRAEL LEE DELEON, 

 Appellant 

 v. 

 THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

 Appellee 

 _______________________________ 

 FROM THE 242ND DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY; 

 NO. B17518-0801; HON. ED SELF, PRESIDING 

 _______________________________ 

Anders Opinion 

_______________________________ 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. 

 Appellant Israel Lee DeLeon was placed on deferred adjudication after pleading 

guilty to the offense of burglary of a habitation. The State sought to have his guilt 

adjudicated and after a hearing, the court revoked appellant’s probation, adjudicated his 

guilt, and sentenced him to fifteen years confinement. 
2 

 Appellant’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with an 

Anders1

 brief, wherein he certifies that, after diligently searching the record, he has 

concluded that the appeal is without merit. Along with his brief, appellate counsel has 

attached a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing him of counsel’s belief that there 

was no reversible error and of appellant’s right to file a response or brief pro se. By 

letter dated May 21, 2010, this court also notified appellant of his right to file his own 

brief or response and set June 21, 2010, as the deadline to do so. To date, we have 

received no response. 

 In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel 

discussed potential areas for appeal. They include 1) the original plea of guilty and 2) 

the sufficiency of the evidence to support an adjudication of guilt. Counsel has 

explained why they lack merit. 

We have also conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of 

appellate counsel’s conclusions and to uncover any error pursuant to Stafford v. State, 

813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Our own review has also failed to reveal any 

reversible error. 

 Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.2

 Brian Quinn 

 Chief Justice 

Do not publish. 

 1

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). 

2

Appellant has the right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review from this opinion.
# C_2008055EN.01000302.xml

| 28.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4986 — EQT V/Securitas Direct)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 55/03)

On 31 January 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M4986. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M4986. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
EXHIBIT 32.1








In connection with the Annual Report of Nano Labs Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ending June 30, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), Bernardo Camacho Chavarria, the Chief Executive Officer andDirectorof the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects the financial condition and results of the Company.






April 23, 2014
By:
/s/ Bernardo Camacho ChavarriaBernardo Camacho Chavarria,Chief Executive Officer

Director
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# Morning of D-Day from LST

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  Morning of D-Day from LST 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States. NavyJamieson, Mitchell, 1915-1976 
                    -           Publisher        
                    -  U.S. Navy 
                    -           Description        
                    -  Morning of D-Day from LST by Mitchell Jamieson 
                    -           Subjects        
                    -  United States. Navy 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1990-20001940-1950 
                    -           Subject: Place        
                    -  France 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  156 × 71 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Ideal Contex Magnum G600 54 Plus at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at The University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  025541685.jpg 
                    -           OCLC Collection Number        
                    -  429489521 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Yummy Flies, Inc.;
 
 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
 
 a.  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedure to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 
 b.  Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
 
 c.  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based upon such evaluation; and
  d.  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.  The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a.  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 
 b.  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
 s/ Gary Okizaki